- From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 20:50:24 -0500
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
- Cc: Brian_McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes/RDF_Semantics_Edit_nT.html now has some tweaks which fix some bugs noted in recent emails. The 'se' rules (now moved into section 4 which now has all the rule stuff in one place) have been modified so that they only generate a single bnode from each URiref or literal in the original graph. This is enough for the closure lemmas and keeps them from generating all those redundant blank-node copies. The definitions of rdf and rdfs interpretations have been slightly tweaked so that the relevant vocabularies contain the rdfV and rdfsV vocabularies (previously, an rdf-interp of V was an interpretation of V+rdfV; now it is just of V, so one has to be explicit about V including the 'special' vocabulary; similarly for rdfsV). The only effect of this tweak (suggested by Dan C) is to make it possible for an rdf-interpretation to only interpret the part of the infinite container vocabulary that it actually needs; so the definitions of closure are now relativized to a vocabulary, and now refer to those axioms which contain names from that vocabulary; and the closure lemmas now refer to closures relative to the vocabulary of (S+E). I have rewritten rule rdf2 so that it replaces an XML literal by its canonical form, rather than allowing arbitrary equality substitutions. The exact wording may need massaging, but the idea seems sound. Taken together, all this enables us to completely avoid the 'infinite' cases in closures, so all closures (from finite graphs wrt a finite vocabulary) are finite, without any need of weasel-words. The weird rule rdfs12 has been further modified. The elegant version suggested by Jos unfortunately turned out to not be quite valid. This rule may still get some further tweaking but this will not change any other part of the MT. The Lbase appendix is now in line with the rest of the document; the datatyping in particular has been rationalized. Apart from getting the XML literal terminology exactly aligned with Concepts, and writing out the proofs properly, I believe this is now pretty much done. On the other hand, Ive said that before.... Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32501 (850)291 0667 cell phayes@ihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Tuesday, 10 June 2003 21:50:30 UTC